Category: Response Papers (March 20) (Page 1 of 2)

It was interesting to read that women are involved in gangs more often than in the past. In some circumstances, it is completely out of their control and against their will. Women, particularly young girls, are sex trafficked. Because prostitution and credit card fraud go unnoticed by police, and are considered lesser crimes than violent crimes and drug dealing, gang members are increasingly choosing to earn money in these less risky ways so that if they are caught, they will face less jail time. The idea that women are also choosing to take on leadership roles in gangs made me think of last week’s reading.

Last week, we were discussing that women are not subjected to being stopped and frisked by the police frequently because it is less likely that they are doing something illegal or are carrying out criminal activity. With this reading, I am realizing even that judgment is incorrect. While the numbers are still small, more women than ever before are becoming active in gangs. In the chapter, Christina Hoag says that girls, more so than boys, are joining gangs for the protection and “family” they provide. The majority of these women report that their actual family members have abused them, sexually and physically. However, Hoag points out that the women are not protected, rather they are treating badly by the men gang members. Some women are used for prostitution, while others buy weapons or hide drugs or even fugitives. Women are the secret weapon of the gangs because they are not suspected by the police.

From using the internet, to committing “low priority” crimes, gangs are changing with the times and finding new ways to stay strong. Simply putting more people behind bars isn’t helping to prevent gangs from committing crimes. We have to make sure our youth don’t join them in the first place. They need to feel that they have another, preferably legal way of making money and feel that they will be safe if they don’t align themselves with a gang. As I’m realizing more and more, that won’t be easy. There are many more definitive problems than there are solutions.

Each chapter in the CQ Reader opens my eyes to topics and ideas I would have never been exposed to otherwise. Gang violence is something I have not had much exposure to beyond what I see on TV. From reading this chapter, it appears that what was once controlled is now becoming a serious issue. Gang violence is picking up again, but in an entirely different and worse form. Gangs are expanding their territories from the typical crimes of drug trafficking to smaller crimes such as credit card fraud and prostitution that allow them to go without being detected by law enforcement. This is a very scary thought for the future of gangs as they move to crimes that are less detectable.

How do we control gangs? Combating gangs is a difficult and never ending task. There are multiple methods that are used in trying to reduce gang violence. While imposing gang injunctions clears the street and may appear as one step in the right direction, it does not ultimately eradicate the issue. Lawrence Rosenthal discusses the positive effect that injunctions have on gangs. When police are present, there is less activity. By forcing the gangs indoors, they are less vulnerable to stop-and-frisk which would prevent them from carrying drugs and guns. Also, they are less violent to participants and bystanders. In opposition, Caitlin Sanderson delved into the the technical and legal aspects of injunctions. She discusses how injunctions are issued against the entire gang causing all members to be included. This would mean that someone hanging out with friends or family on the street can be arrested, which is a serious issue.

There are alternative ways to combat gangs and Sanderson mentions some of them. She recommends “after-school programs, job training, and early intervention.” I agree with Sanderson’s suggestions. I believe that knowledge and mentorship are powerful. If we can get these young men the proper mentors to help guide them and show them the proper way to live, we can expose them to a different way of life. Obviously this is easier said than done. Gang intervention is another component; one I have some difficulty with. I think it is a great thought, but not necessarily something that can easily turn into a reality. Wes McBride, a gang investigator said, “I’m not really big on gang intervention because I’m not sure what an ex-gang member is.” I think McBride makes an excellent point. What really is an ex-gang member? All in all, opening up community centers, education and mentorship programs for young boys to go to to allow them to have a chance in this very crazy world.

Gangs have greatly evolved over the years and are making use of technology to extend their influence over people. For example, the gangs of today have their own websites and YouTube videos or use even use Facebook and Twitter to communicate with others, especially those of the younger generation who would be susceptible to their influence. After all, gang members on average are only about 17 years old so its not so much a surprise that many of their members are taking advantage of social media. It’s much easier for a gang to spread a message and taunt another gang through social media than to actually do it in the opposing gang’s territory. This leads us to the question, how do we reduce the amount of gang activity in our local neighborhoods?

One of the strategies used was to impose injunctions on gangs and prevent members of those gangs from meeting in public. This was controversial because gang members who would only be in a gang for a short amount of time would have an injunction imposed on them that goes on for the rest of their life. There’s also the chance that someone who has been labeled a gang member is actually not and has never been a gang member at all. However, this method can be effective because it increases transparency and strengthens enforcement of the law in crime hot spots or gang territories. It is simply less likely that someone is going to carry around a gun or have drugs on them if there is a significant police presence in their vicinity.

While this could be a solid strategy to counteract gang activity in our neighborhoods, I don’t believe it is enough to get rid of gangs. Gangs are getting increasingly smarter, and are participating in crimes that are harder to track by the police due to their non-violent nature, so it would only be appropriate if the police improved their methods for gathering information and made better use of technology. If done so, the police would fare much better at stopping a crime before it happens or at least being able to gather enough evidence to find the culprit and punish them for their misdeeds. However, in the end, due to the very nature of gangs, it is very unlikely that we will ever see them go away.

What struck me most in this reading is the way in which gangs have evolved to adapt in the 21^st century. The stereotypical drugs and guns we associate with street gangs are often inadequate to describe the modern gang which more and more often is getting their hands on prostitution, credit card fraud, and other lucrative, but highly specialized crimes. By engaging in illegal activity which require more complex examination and are not immediately threatening (such as guns and ‘turf’ wars), gangs are becoming more sophisticated and better able to evade the police.

Still, the question as to how we may combat further gang activity is a very real problem that needs to be addressed. On the one hand we have the argument presented by Lawrence Rosenthal who believes that preventative measures, such as greater police presence, injunctions, and other aggressive tactics are at the heart of curbing gang activity. However, it is clear from other chapters and from my observations that such practices only serve to fuel additional tensions between police and the community. Members of the community will be more likely to embrace the assessment of police as enemies trying to throw them in jail rather than as law enforcement officers trying to maintain peace and safety for all.

What’s more is that Rosenthal’s position fails to consider the socioeconomic and psychological underpinnings that lead individuals to congregate in gangs in the first place. Often the driving force in gang involvement simply has to do with the sense of identity a gang provides, especially for our youth and for those that have been beaten down by our discriminatory system after attempting to achieve success through a legal means. And so, instead of attacking them in such a fashion, and very likely impinging upon their constitutional rights in the process (as is suggested by Sanderson), it’s a good idea to look towards education, working with the youth in impoverished areas early on and giving them alternative means to express themselves as a long term solution to an ongoing problem.

For much of history, gangs have formed of those individuals who are cast out of higher groups or cannot attain higher status, who form a pack and work their way to secure resources or success in whatever form, be it territorial, financial, or otherwise, often by violent, and usually by illegal means. For almost as long as there have been gangs, law enforcement have tried to eliminate them, and usually fail.

As the technology age dawned and the world adapted to it, so have gangs. The internet allows for more efficient recruiting and more covert communication, very much like terrorist organizations, namely ISIS, have. Law enforcement also has adapted to fight online crime, but gangs seem to always be one step ahead, becoming resistant to developed techniques to stop them. With something as vast, complex, and opportunity-presenting as the internet, it only takes a few steps to start an anonymous life in a community, and, depending on how good at it you are, make yourself incredibly difficult to track. In fact, that’s most of what something called the Deep Web or Dark Web is all about.

The answer to obliterating gangs must come from the root. People vulnerable to recruitment into these communities are often from underprivileged areas, low on the socioeconomic hierarchy, with limited access to needed resources to improve their quality of life, and often an insufficient education to boot. Gang formation is a troubling, often dangerous symptom of much larger issues in a society, issues that have persisted for thousands of years and probably to some degree will continue to persist. However, treating those issues and alleviating some of the burden on lower socioeconomic tiers may make a gang dilemma less acute.

Throughout the reading I noticed one pattern which is gangs are developed due to specific ethnic or racial groups seeking survival. For example many immigrant gangs that were developed like the Mexican gangs were created in order to secure a neighborhood as there own, therefore protecting them from outside forces. Other racial gangs like those created by black people were used to provide them with financial security as many ended up living on welfare, and in project buildings due to not getting enough or low wage jobs, and being blocked from buying homes when moving up north from the Jim Crow south. Even prison gangs were made as prisoners were looking for protection to survive prison.  I feel that the chapter did not go into detail about why different racial, mainly street gang members, felt that being apart of a gang was necessary. For example; many gangs organized by black people were created to combat the poverty that was inflicted on them due discriminatory laws and practices. So many felt that they had to involve themselves in acts such as narcotics, weapons, and more recently human trafficking as a way of providing for their families, and maybe even getting themselves out of the projects. Although the chapter did mention that many gangs like immigrants were constructed to congregate against assimilated ethnic groups, they also did not mention that gangs like the CRIPS were established to fight police brutality, and to protect the neighborhood from unfair treatment by law enforcement. Although the ulterior motive of gangs was a sense of financial and security protection from outsiders, there overall production lead to heinous crimes that have hurt innocent bystanders, even the people within the gangs.

Although law enforcement, and the federal government have been cracking down on gang activity, I am skeptical of their actions because many of the attempts to catch gang activity have been aimed towards stopping street level gangs, which in many cases end up being minority who live in impoverished neighborhoods. I am questioning if it is easier to find street level gang activity because it is more out in the open, or because of the stigmas that are carried by minorities that live in low income areas, law enforcement feels more justified to crack down on them? I also wonder for the more organized gangs like biker or mobs, who are mainly white, does their whiteness play a role in them not being arrested for gang activity, or their activities and business tactics protect them from being caught by investigators?  Even though they implemented using injunctions on potential suspects to protect them from being profiled as gang members, I wonder if they will instill those same rule on all gang organizations. One activity that was developed to combat gang involvement is using ex cons and gang members to talk to young men about the consequences of joining gangs. Even though some are skeptical that the program may be secretly promoting gang activity, I feel that people listen to those that they can relate to not those who they feel threatened by like officers. An issue with gangs that is troubling me is the new tactic of human trafficking to generate money. I find it to be disturbing that they would utilize mainly teenage and adult women to make their profit especially because those women can be their mother, sister, daughter, and friend. I do wonder if the thousands of black and Latino women missing in the US has a connection to gang activity? Also, I want to know what is being done to detect it, and protect women from being kidnapped and sold into it? Overall I found the chapter on gangs to be quite insightful, even though I am questioning what is being done to stop all gang activity.

Gangs are becoming more sophisticated and law enforcement has to keep up. Gangs are using social media to recruit people. I wonder how they use social media and if the gangs are worried about a trail left behind because nothing is a secret on the internet. And I wonder what is posted on their sites? Many gangs have turned to human trafficking and law enforcement officials overlook gangs’ involvement in human trafficking more now. Human trafficking affects 20+ million people and it’s an organized business that needs more law enforcement attention.

I believe educating youths, offering job training programs and extracurricular activities can help reduce the likelihood of gang members that are vulnerable to becoming recruited. Others may not agree, but letting youths know there are other options than becoming a gang member can be beneficial. And the youths can’t just be told about the offers, they need guidance along the way because there will be gangs pressuring them to join.

The CQ chapter states that some gang crimes are not reported enough because they keep a low profile. For example, Asian gangs aren’t territorial and they victimize their community members. What is unfortunate is the fact that the members of the community don’t report the crimes because of fear (I would be afraid, too), but also language barriers. The members of the community shouldn’t feel that language barriers are in the way of justice. Law enforcement should have more translators if there aren’t enough, and law enforcement should educate communities that speaking another language is not an issue if they need help.

Injunctions sounds like it can work, but gang members will also be more careful about meeting in public and can avoid injunctions. But injunctions also rely on profiling as the CQ chapter says police and prosecutors make their own list of what gang members look like. I understand what Morreale says, that “the more gangs get hassled for the little things, the less time they have for the big things,” but it’s also not okay for people to be at family party or walking home late and be in violation.

Gang is a very unfamiliar term for me. I did learn about various types of gangs in New York when I was in elementary but that was about it. Living in peaceful neighborhood, people often forget about people in those rough neighborhoods. My last impression of gangs remains in violence outbreaks and distinctive clothing. However, Christina Hoag gave us the most recent update on how gangs work now. The fist gang ever appeared in 16th century, England. In the United States, gangs first appeared after the Revolutionary War to gain territory. After the mass immigration waves, immigrants began to form their own gangs for protection. The most famous one was the Latinos gang. Their connection with other Latino gangs provided more issues here.

As time has passed on, gang become more sophisticated. They no longer relied on drug and illegal weapon dealings, they move their businesses to more lucrative trades. For example, more and more gangs are set their hands in prostitution, human trafficking, online fraud etc. According to National Gang Intelligence Center, there is a 40 percent increase in gang membership since 2009. They find that, “Gangs are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others.” (434) Most violence incidents have connections to gang rivals. This directly cause to have more victims on the science because there will be more firearms and more use of synthetic drug. Teens are often the victims between the gang violence. They seek identity and protection which sometimes their homes cannot offer. Gangs become their second home. This is the case for both boys and girls. Experts has seen a rising number in female participation in gang activities. It is unknown why there is more female participation, but police often overlook the fact that women can commit violence acts as well. Additional to more female involvement, internet also become a strong weapon for the gangs. Because of the exponential growth of the social media, gangs start to use social media to recruit new members and wage wars against their rival gangs. Teens use internet a lot so it is easy to influence them over the internet. Rap and hip-hop music glorify the lifestyle of gangsters which can strike a false impression.

In order to prevent the growth of gangs, it is important to start with the youth population. They are often lure by the cool outlook of the gang. I find the Youth PROMISE Act is a good way to start because it teaches kids about the gangs and help rival gangs to negotiate when there is an issue. It is necessary to prevent kids from entering gangs because gangs are fueled by youth to commit crimes. At the same time, these youths can achieve higher education so they can bring their own family to a better neighborhood. It will also save taxpayer money from sending more people to the prison.

This weeks reading from Urban Issues shed light on a prevalent issue of gangs and gang violence plaguing NYC. The term ‘gang’ has a pejorative connotation and is associated with violence and criminal activity. The gangs of today are different than the gangs of yesteryear in that the latter formed for protection and fought over “turf” while the latter primarily fights over drugs and the like. This negative view of gangs underlies many of the initiatives that states have recently taken to combat gangs and gang crimes.

There have been a few general strategies in the fight against gangs such as counterinsurgency, prevention of gang formation, and youth engaging activities etc. Law professor, Lawrence Rosenthal advocates for preventative measures in the war against gangs and calls for counterinsurgency and gang injunctions which places restrictions and makes it more difficult for gang members to congregate. This concept of injunctions is a more aggressive and preemptive approach to criminal activity and is similar in approach to last weeks reading regarding racial profiling and the stop and frisk method.  While these approaches can be said to be on the safer side, averting problems before than can arise, opponents argue that this is an abridgment of civil liberties as explained by Caitlin Sanderson, an attorney at ACLU. She argues that our justice system is biased and suspectful of certain races, a separate issue on its own and injunctions not only hurt these youths’ futures long term but could also possibly worsen gang activity by initiating increased internet and technological uses.

While I do believe  that there is a strong basis in preventative measures such as gang injunctions and believe that we shouldn’t wait to fix something only after a problem arises, reading this weeks chapter opened my eyes to the harmful affects of it as well. Sanderson’s proposition of after school programs and early intervention provides for a more welcoming route of preventative policing and can be effective as well. Overall, I think that a combination of Rosenthal’s and Sanderson’s suggestions, with a few tweaks here and there on both sides, can effectively reduce gang activity and crime.

The main takeaway I got from reading Chapter 7 of the CQ Reader was the fact that, not only are gangs still prevalent, but they are becoming more of a problem; and that they are spreading with regard to what they do. Usually a gang is thought of in the most simplest of terms and in the way they have been portrayed in movies and the like for years: a group of guys who hang out together and fight ‘turf wars’  with other gangs. However, that is far from what gangs are or have become. This chapter informs you that there are now many woman who not only join gangs, but are leaders of gangs, and that what gangs do with their time has changed drastically as well. While another label people might have been used to associating with gangs was the fact that they weren’t the brightest, gangs today are stepping up their game; they are hacking, scamming banks, running well organized prostitution rings, etc.

The fact that the advancement of technology has been something gangs have used to become more spread out and effective is the least bit surprising at all. The internet has become a place where, anybody who wants to spread a certain ideal, recruit people to their ’cause’, or incite/rile up people, can accomplish their task extremely easily by using Facebook or Youtube or any other platform. Gangs aren’t the only groups to realize how the internet can help them and utilize it; terrorist groups around the world have taken to the worldwide web to do recruiting and incite attacks also. That is something that, in my opinion, can’t be so hard to track. Meaning, with all the intelligence and technology this country has, we should be able to find the posts or accounts of gangs/ gang members and just stop them from posting. It’s something that should be done with terrorists groups as well but hasn’t and the same thing applies to gangs.

With regard to the injunctions, it’s hard to believe that is the best way experts have come up with on how to stop gangs. This country is, as Judge Cohen said a couple weeks ago, a place that believes in and prides itself on second chances. So if someone was in a gang and decided that it was wrong and that they wanted to turn their life around for the better, why would we ever put obstacles in his or her path and keep that person on a list that associates them with gangs? While the idea behind these injunctions might be correct and might actually work, the implementation and way it’s carried out has to be changed.